Wednesday, September 30, 2015

ABOGADONG PULIS-An Entertainment

Reviewing and analyzing the comments that I received in the first article about Atty Claire Castro, one comment stood out as the Anonymous commenter unabashedly flaunted his lawyering skills.  I guess that he is a police lawyer as this is what their Facebook Group “POLICE MATTERS IN LAW-AN OPEN GROUP” said so let me assume that he is, for the purpose of this article.  His comments in full are as follows:

Atty. Claire is correct. Its frustrating that many policemen don't know the law. Kaya madaming palpak na police. Let me do this brief outline for you and pakisabi nlang din sa mga kakilala mong pulis.

As a general rule, there must be a warrant of arrest in order to apprehend an accused. Exceptions are the following: 1. In flagrante delicto, 2. Hot pursuit, 3. Evasion of service. Igoogle mo nlang ibig sabihin nyan. Tingin ko, medyo tanga ka nlang kung kasama dyan ang pag"MALL". Dyos ko po.

Tapos check mo nman yang case na cinicite mo. Valmonte vs. De villa. Checkpoint yan sir. May check point ba sa mall. Tapos search ang subject matter dyan. Search, hindi arrest. Nakakainit ka ng ulo eh. Kung may icicite ka na kaso siguraduhin mo nman na tama, nakakainsulto ka sa mga nagaral nyan eh.

And lastly, buti nlang hanggang bunganga lang inabot nyo kay atty. Claire. Kung ako yan, magfifile ako ng criminal complaint for arbitrary detention + administrative. Anong ground? Bawal ang TANGA sa polisya.




Well, let me answer him punto por punto from the standpoint of a “police officer LANG” na kung maliitin nilang mga abogado ay ganun ganun na lang.  I will use his full comment and insert my arguments in RED UPPERCASE LETTERS. I will place the words that I want omitted in (parenthesis and strikethrough).  So here we go:


EVEN IF Atty. Claire is correct, (.) Its frustrating that many policemen LAWYERS don't know the (law) TRUE SPIRIT AND MEANING OF SERVICE. Kaya madaming palpak na ABOGADONG-police SA TRABAHO NILA BILANG PULIS KASI ANG MINDSET NILA AY ABOGADO PA RIN KAHIT NA ANG FUNCTION NILA AY PULIS SA POLICE STATION AT HINDI SA KORTE.  ANG TRABAHO NILA SA POLICE STATION AY BILANG MGA PULIS AT HINDI BILANG MGA OFFICER OF THE COURT AT ITO AY MUKHANG HINDI NILA ALAM.  Let me do this brief outline for you and pakisabi nlang din sa mga kakilala mong ABOGADONG-pulis.

As a general rule, there must be AN ACTION ON THE COMPLAINT OF PEOPLE COMING TO THE POLICE STATIONS.  VARIOUS REGULATIONS MANDATE THAT THIS ACTION MUST BE FAST, EFFICIENT, AND EFFECTIVE AND MOST IMPORTANTLY, SATISFIES THE NEEDS OF OUR CLIENTS.  YES, AS A GENERAL RULE, a warrant of arrest IS NEEDED in order to apprehend A SUSPECT (an accused) BUT THRERE ARE EXCEPTIONS TO THIS GENERAL RULE.  THESE Exceptions are the following: 1. In flagrante delicto, 2. Hot pursuit, 3. Evasion of service, THUS THE POLICE MUST STRIVE HARD TO PLACE THEMSELVES IN THESE POSITIONS SO THAT AN IMMEDIATE ARREST CAN BE LEGALLY EFFECTED. Igoogle mo nlang ibig sabihin nyan. Tingin ko, medyo tanga ka nlang kung HINDI kasama dyan ang pag"MALL" KASI PAG NAG MALL ANG ISANG SUSPECT, NAPAKARAMI MONG OPPORTUNITY NA MAKA CONDUCT NG MAAYOS AT LEGAL NA WARRANTLESS ARREST—LALO NA KUNG ALAM MO ANG IYONG GINAGAWA.  FOR EXAMPLE, GUSTO MO LANG MAKILALA ANG SUSPECT KASI HINDI MO ALAM ANG FULL NAME NYA.  PAG NAKITA MO SYA SA MALL, UTUSAN MO ANG STRIKER NYO NA IPROVOKE SYA NG AWAY GAYA NG PAGBANGGA SA KANYA.  NOW KUNG MAGKAPIKUNAN SILA, SYEMPRE MAG AAWAY SILA.  PASOK NGAYON ANG GUARDS THEN ANG PULIS.  SA SECURITY OFFICE, PAG AAYUSIN MO SILA SYEMPRE PERO DAHIL KAILANGAN IBLOTTER ANG INSIDENTE, NATURAL NA MAKUKUHA MO NA ANG LAHAT NG PERSONAL CIRCUMSTANCES NG SUSPECT.  KUNG HINDI SILA MAGKAAYOS NG STRIKER MO, E DI INQUEST MO ANG STRIKER MO THEN PYANSAHAN MO NG P2,000—YAN AY KUNG NAPAKAHINA MO NA HINDI MO MAPA RFI SA PISKAL ANG KASO. Dyos ko po ATORNING PULIS, HINDI MO ALAM YAN?  AY OO NGA PALA, ABOGADO KA NGA PALA AT MUKHANG NAKALIMUTAN MO LANG YATA NA PULIS KA PA RIN.

Tapos check mo nman yang case na (cinicite) INAASSAIL MO mo. Valmonte vs. De villa. Checkpoint yan ATTORNEY sir. (May) PERO SA check point LANG ba (sa mall) APPLICABLE YAN?  (Tapos) search MO ang subject matter dyan. OO NGA, Search, hindi arrest ANG TOPIC PERO KUNG BINASA MO ANG BUONG CASE DECISION, GANITO ANG PAGKALATAG  (ETO WEB ADDRESS O: http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1990/may1990/gr_83988_1990.html)

Besides these warrantless searches and seizures at the checkpoints are quite similar to searches and seizures accompanying warrantless arrests during the commission of a crime, or immediately thereafter. In People vs. Kagui Malasuqui it was held—

To hold that no criminal can, in any case, be arrested and searched for the evidence and tokens of his crime without a warrant, would be to leave society, to a large extent, at the mercy of the shrewdest the most expert, and the most depraved of criminals, facilitating their escape in many instances (63 Phil. 221).

KITAMS?  GALING PALA SA IBA PANG DECISION YAN ATTORNEY, SO ISEARCH NATIN ANG PINANGGALINGAN, ANG PEOPLE VS KAGUI MALASUQUI.  GANITO NAMAN ANG PAGKALATAG DOON (ETO ULI ANG WEB ADDRESS:  http://www.lawphil.net/judjuris/juri1936/jul1936/gr_l-44335_1936.html) :

Anent an identical question, the Supreme Court of Virginia, in United States vs. Snyder, supra, said:

To hold that no criminal can, in any case, be arrested and searched for the evidence and tokens of his crime without a warrant, would be to leave society, to a large extent, at the mercy of the shrewdest, the most expert, and the most depraved of criminals, facilitating their escape in many instances.

NAKU PAANO YAN ATTORNEY, ANG KASONG ITO NI KAGUI AY ROBBERY WITH HOMICIDE AT ANG JURISPRUDENCE AY ICINITE NG SUPREME COURT KASI KINUWESTYON NYA ANG WARRANTLESS ARREST SA KANYA AT ANG SEARCH NA NAGING INCIDENTAL SA ARREST NA YAN!

AND TO ILLUSTRATE FURTHER ATTORNEY, THIS CASE WAS AGAIN CITED IN PEOPLE OF THE PHILIPPINES vs. GABRIEL GERENTE y BULLO.  THE SUPREME COURT AGAIN SAID:

In Umil vs. Ramos, 187 SCRA 311, the arrest of the accused without a warrant was effected one (1) day after he had shot to death two Capcom soldiers. The arrest was held lawful by this Court upon the rationale stated by us in People vs. Malasugui, 63 Phil. 221, 228, thus:

"To hold that no criminal can, in any case, be arrested and searched for the evidence and tokens of his crime without a warrant, would be to leave society, to a large extent, at the mercy of the shrewdest, the most expert, and the most depraved of criminals, facilitating their escape in many instances."

SO HERE, WARRANTLESS ARREST NA TALAGA ANG PINAG UUSAPAN.  PAANO NA ANG LUSOT MO NGAYON ATTORNEY SIR?

Nakakainit ka ng ulo eh. Kung may (icicite) IAASSAIL ka na kaso siguraduhin mo nman na tama, nakakainsulto ka sa mga nagaral nyan eh.  AT SAKA HINDI BA NAKAKAHIYA YAN SA MGA HINDI NAG ARAL NYAN GAYA NG MGA PULIS LANG NA GAYA KO?  OR ALAM MO TALAGA NA MALI YANG BANAT MO AT SINUBUKAN MO LANG LUMUSOT?  IS THIS ANOTHER CASE OF INTELLECTUAL PREVARICATION JUST LIKE WHAT ATTY CLAIRE CASTRO DID WHEN SHE SHOUTED “IPAFILE PA LANG ANG KASO!” IMPLYING THAT THE ARREST WAS ILLEGAL BECAUSE OF THAT!  BAKIT ATTORNEY, SA INQUEST BA, ALIN ANG MAUUNA, ANG ARESTO OR ANG PAGFILE NG KASO THROUGH INQUEST?  LIAR, LIAR?

And lastly, buti nlang hanggang (bunganga) SIMPLENG ARESTO lang inabot (nyo kay) NI atty. Claire SA MPD. Kung SA AKIN MO GINAWA MO YUN, (ako yan), POPOSASAN KITA, IPAPASOK KITA SA SELDA AT magfifile ako ng criminal complaint for (arbitrary detention) DIRECT ASSAULT, OBSTRUCTION AT MARAMI PANG IBA + administrative NA DISBARMENT.  Anong ground? Bawal ang TATANGA TANGANG ABOGADONG PULIS sa polisya.

Any comments dear readers?  I hope I entertained you with this article!


No comments:

Post a Comment

tell me what you think!